Operation Vast & Obvious Grows Ominous

When Operation Fast & Furious first broke into the news, many of us immediately questioned the DoJ's irrational rationale. The proffered assertion that the program was designed to track firearms purchased in America to leaders of the Mexican drug cartels simply made no sense. The glaringly obvious flaw in the strategy was the lack of means to track the weapons once they crossed the border into Mexico. That flaw was made painfully obvious by the disclosure from the ATF's own lead agent in Mexico that neither he nor the Mexican authorities knew anything of the operation.That we were asked to believe something so laughably unbelievable by our federal government led many of us to become immediately suspect of the true motive behind this skewed operation. Knowing that our government was headed by a bunch of 2d Amendment detractors from Chicago, America's most antigun city, it wasn't difficult to imagine that the true purpose of this badly bungled fiasco wasn't antidrug or anticrime at all: it was a purely antigun and anti-constitutional.

That suspicion was reinforced when one remembered how the same politicians had ballyhooed to the press that it was American firearms fueling the violence in Mexico. That obvious lie was then conveniently utilized by other Democrat politicians to justify demands for stricter national gun controls. Ironic, isn't it, that the same Hillary Clinton who painted herself and her philandering spouse as victims of a vast rightwing conspiracy, now appears to have been a key participant in a vast leftwing conspiracy to defraud the American people? Consider that if the liberal media had done their jobs and investigated F&F instead of ignoring it, this huge criminal fraud which is now becoming obvious, would have been exposed much sooner

Over at Pajamas Media, author, Bob Owen, who has chronicled this mess better than most, has an excellent piece where he further destroys the insipid rationale first fed to the public by the Holder Justice Department: that Operation F&F was designed to entrap cartel leaders. Owen uses a spot-on analogy, pointing out that to cartel leaders, who are corporate executives, criminal executives perhaps, but executives none-the-less, of huge marketing and distribution organizations, guns are a disposable commodity much as copy paper is to any legitimate corporate executive. The guns, like copy paper, are essential to the conduct of business, but their procurement falls to lesser beings in the organization. That such guns are usually left at the crime scene reinforces Owen's claim of indifferent disposability. Applying Owen's analogy to Holder's rationale would require us to accept the obvious fallacy that DoJ could entrap suspect corporate executives through their companies' purchases of copy paper.

Owen closes with the no-nonsense observation that those politicians who put this plan into operation are, at the minimum, complicit in the deaths of hundreds of Mexican citizens. Certainly the ties between those planners and the deaths is less tenuous than the ties between cartel leaders and gun purchases. Consider that the intent of the program was for the guns to be found at crime scenes; otherwise there was no legitimate, rational purpose for the operation whatsoever. None. Those guns that ATF allowed to be funneled into Mexico had to be used to commit violent crimes so that those crimes could justify stricter American gun control. That intent invites a consideration of deliberate anticipation of violence resulting in multiple deaths by those too-clever-by-half political developers of the plan. Another word for anticipation is premeditation. Combine hundreds of murders with the possibility of premeditation and we are no longer just talking about an embarrassing political farce but serious criminal conspiracy charges carrying severe penalties of long term imprisonment.

Which would explain why Holder, a lawyer, is covering up so fast and furiously.

Compared to this criminal enterprise, Watergate was nothing. Go read Owen's article in its entirety.

When Operation Fast & Furious first broke into the news, many of us immediately questioned the DoJ's irrational rationale. The proffered assertion that the program was designed to track firearms purchased in America to leaders of the Mexican drug cartels simply made no sense. The glaringly obvious flaw in the strategy was the lack of means to track the weapons once they crossed the border into Mexico. That flaw was made painfully obvious by the disclosure from the ATF's own lead agent in Mexico that neither he nor the Mexican authorities knew anything of the operation.

That we were asked to believe something so laughably unbelievable by our federal government led many of us to become immediately suspect of the true motive behind this skewed operation. Knowing that our government was headed by a bunch of 2d Amendment detractors from Chicago, America's most antigun city, it wasn't difficult to imagine that the true purpose of this badly bungled fiasco wasn't antidrug or anticrime at all: it was a purely antigun and anti-constitutional.

That suspicion was reinforced when one remembered how the same politicians had ballyhooed to the press that it was American firearms fueling the violence in Mexico. That obvious lie was then conveniently utilized by other Democrat politicians to justify demands for stricter national gun controls. Ironic, isn't it, that the same Hillary Clinton who painted herself and her philandering spouse as victims of a vast rightwing conspiracy, now appears to have been a key participant in a vast leftwing conspiracy to defraud the American people? Consider that if the liberal media had done their jobs and investigated F&F instead of ignoring it, this huge criminal fraud which is now becoming obvious, would have been exposed much sooner

Over at Pajamas Media, author, Bob Owen, who has chronicled this mess better than most, has an excellent piece where he further destroys the insipid rationale first fed to the public by the Holder Justice Department: that Operation F&F was designed to entrap cartel leaders. Owen uses a spot-on analogy, pointing out that to cartel leaders, who are corporate executives, criminal executives perhaps, but executives none-the-less, of huge marketing and distribution organizations, guns are a disposable commodity much as copy paper is to any legitimate corporate executive. The guns, like copy paper, are essential to the conduct of business, but their procurement falls to lesser beings in the organization. That such guns are usually left at the crime scene reinforces Owen's claim of indifferent disposability. Applying Owen's analogy to Holder's rationale would require us to accept the obvious fallacy that DoJ could entrap suspect corporate executives through their companies' purchases of copy paper.

Owen closes with the no-nonsense observation that those politicians who put this plan into operation are, at the minimum, complicit in the deaths of hundreds of Mexican citizens. Certainly the ties between those planners and the deaths is less tenuous than the ties between cartel leaders and gun purchases. Consider that the intent of the program was for the guns to be found at crime scenes; otherwise there was no legitimate, rational purpose for the operation whatsoever. None. Those guns that ATF allowed to be funneled into Mexico had to be used to commit violent crimes so that those crimes could justify stricter American gun control. That intent invites a consideration of deliberate anticipation of violence resulting in multiple deaths by those too-clever-by-half political developers of the plan. Another word for anticipation is premeditation. Combine hundreds of murders with the possibility of premeditation and we are no longer just talking about an embarrassing political farce but serious criminal conspiracy charges carrying severe penalties of long term imprisonment.

Which would explain why Holder, a lawyer, is covering up so fast and furiously.

Compared to this criminal enterprise, Watergate was nothing. Go read Owen's article in its entirety.